Countdown Interview: Up Close & Clinton
By Logan Murphy Thursday Oct 11, 2007 11:00am
On Thursday's Countdown Keith Olbermann interviewed Sen. Hillary Clinton, covering a wide number of issues including the swift boating of Graeme Frost and SCHIP, Iran, the pending FISA legislation and even the movement to draft Al Gore. Clinton calls out the right for stalking and smearing a 12 year old boy -- and we now know that the lies behind this hate-fest from the right came in the form of an e-mail to reporters from Republican Senator Mitch McConnell's Communications Director, Don Stewart. Stewart should be condemned and fired for putting the Frost family in such danger.
Download | play 
Download | play (clip is 14:26)
Senator Clinton defended her vote on the Lieberman/Kyl amendment, saying it was misunderstood by some and misrepresented by others, and that it in no way gives the president authorization to invade Iran. Hillary also touts the Iran amendment she co-sponsored with Senator Jim Webb and sees it as an opportunity to use diplomatic means to deal with Iran instead of President Bush's cowboy diplomacy. As for a possible Nobel Prize and White House run by Al Gore? You'll have to watch the clip...
Login or Register to post comments.
Yes. Some consequences deserved here. I hope McConnell is dressed down publicly on the floor of the Senate too...
regardless of the rationale behind the vote for the lieberman amendment i don' now nor will i ever trust anyone who sides with elmer fudd on anything.
She also vowed a complete withdrawal from Iraq by end of first term ... CHELSEA'S!
no longer a proud american @ 2:
Or for the Webb amendment either. She is the one who is misleading.
"Misunderstood by some and misrepresented by others"
...Welcome to the Clinton "44" Adminstration.
Edwards...Please.
with regard to the swiftboating of a 12 year old, ""Have You No Sense of Decency" never more apropos.
Johnny2Bad @ 5:
OH PLEASE..................
so hillary thinks im an idiot
the soviet union also funded and trained terrorist orgs, yet we never labled their military a terrorist org
she is bush lite, with the ability to string full sentences together
What did Mrs. Clinton mean when she said something about Keith at the very beginning of the interview? Something along the lines of "I hear you're doing well"
Was that a ratings allusion?
The authorization to use force (Iraq) five years ago gave the President the authority to pursue terrorist targets world-wide.
The Lieberman-Kyl ammendment labeled the Iranian military as a terrorist organization.
YOU DO THE MATH!!!
Jebus, I am so sick of politicians who think we're all too damned stupid to see what's going on.
I can't support Hillary because I'm going to vote for a Democrat.
uncle joe mccarthy @ 8:
Well, then we'll have a Republican as President again....
Hillary can beat the Repugs.....
Again.... Hillary can win.
Winning is the only game right now.
We need to win first and then start changing the game.
John Tully @ 9:
Didn't he have his appendix removed recently?
Regardless of how you feel about Hillary - and I think she's too conservative - she did well again.
Personally, I like Kucinich.
Practically, I'd love to see Gore.
I WILL vote for whichever Democrat is nominated.
And if Ralph Nader's ego runs again to draw off the left wing ideologue vote that could put Rudy in office. The purists can smiugly say they vote their conscience, but in my opinion, they'll just guarantee a Rudy win and then shriek for 4 years about a President worse than Dubya.
Will 2008 be the year the American people finally resort to choosing a president who gives thoughtful, intelligent, coherent responses to the questions and hails from the Party that has produced presidents who manage, time after time, to preside over more positive times than its obvious competitor regardless of how hard the MSM and the competitor tries to spin us away from her and her Party?
If so, then Hillary Clinton wins.
RandyBastard @ 10:
Jeebus, I'm so sick of Democrats not being able to see the forest for the trees.....
I'll take a Clinton back in the White House any day...
John Tully @ 11:
Spoken like a true DLCer.
anonymous @ 12:
I figgered it was something else but I think that must be it....
YAK YAK YAK! Never vote for that opportunist. She's a smart Bush which makes her twice as dangerous.
I think that she had some very good points in this interview, and Keith also didn't softball her at all. I'm glad he asked about the Kyl amendment and talking about the rejection of "cowboy diplomacy" gave me hope for america's future.
I hear some of the crap she does, and I hate her for it, but then when she actually talks about the reasoning, she starts making sense again. Her health care proposition is broken, but it's a **** of a lot better than the current system or anything the Repugs are proposing. She's better than Kerry ever was, and as far as democratic nominees, we could definately do worse.
The question you have to ask yourself, is why Faux news has an entire show to stopping her election (the Sean Hannity show). Why is she so frightening to the repugs?
John Tully @ 11:
other than nominating normal judges, wanna explain to me how the country will be better off with hillary?
she is in the pocket of big pharma and the corporatists
she will propose and sign a bill allowing for a guest worker program that will spell the demise of unions
she will not end the occupation in iraq, and may indeed expand it into iran
i lay odds that her presidency, just like her husbands will cause the loss of both the senate and te house
the idea that she is the best choice out of all the dems, just because she can speak out of both sides of her mouth, is pure lunacy
At the risk of being ripped to shreds by my own kind.....she seems very presidential, and she's a tough old battle ax. Like her or hate her, she's the only one that has the balls and brains to fend off the right wing smear machine. Christ, I'm still praying Gore jumps in. Clark is out... Dennis is sweet but he'd get eaten alive by the right wing. And I read somewhere his gorgeous wife has a pierced tongue, it was in Time or Newsweek or Charmine (yeah, that'll play well in middle America. Hey, I've had ...piercings...in ...places). Look, vote for your dream canidate but for God's sake back whoever is outr nomination.
uncle joe mccarthy @ 20:
Clinton is a member of the CFR and she profited from the war she not only voted for but also parroted the administration lies about on the floor of the Senate, while owning stocks in major military contractors.
Her husbands NAFTA has done more harm to the american working and middle class than anything else could have, while making the family that owns Walmart the richest in the country. The same Walmart Hillary had a seat on the board of Directors.
The corporatist media is pushing her as the only viable candidate for a reason; she is in their pockets and she will continue this globalization, through-out her presidency.
Please read "The Obvious Connections..." at http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/the-obvious-connections-are-t... !
This corporatist campaign has got to come to an end, so we must expose where it all started.
xxx @ 19:
B/c in the republic world, she's uppity. Think of "The Breakfast Club" - "shut up bitch, and make me a turkey pot pie"
While Hillary does indeed have weak points, she is the only one with "balls" to face the right wingers and take them to task. Plus she has a masterful PR person behind her (Bill). So I will feel good even if she were nominated. Edwards sounds good, but it is difficult to gauge his electability in the general election.
Bottomline...I will vote for whoever is nominated for the Democratic ticket. Even the most right wing democrat is an extreme leftist when compared to the righties.
uncle joe mccarthy @ 20:
SHE'S THE BEST CHOICE BECAUSE SHE'S THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN BEAT THE REPUBLICANS AND THAT'S THE GAME!
(excuse the shouting)
yellow dog @ 13:
I must agree that she is far too conservative, but did well here. However, I'll vote for her in the general election if she is on the ticket. The time to vote your conscience is in the primary - in the general election, those of good conscience vote for the Democratic candidate.
John Tully @ 11:
Not so fast. According to an NPR poll, Hillary barley beats Giuliani by three percentage points. In most polls, that's within a margin of error. Contrast that to a generic contest between the two parties and the Democrats win over the Republicans by over thirteen percentage points. What this could be showing is that we need to fins a candidate who can beat the Republicans as handily as the generic poll suggests is possible. Neither Hillary nor Obama seem to able to do this, he was in a dead heat with Giuliani.
Who is this candidate? I don't know. I doubt highly it will be Gore. He has stated strongly enough to convince me that he has no intention of entering the race. We need a candidate who will bring those numbers to fruition.
For reference go to the Morning Edition page at http://www.npr.org/ to see the poll results.
clinton doesn't have to apologize for anything, maybe at most just explain why she voted a certain way, and she's done that. it's BUSH who made the decision to invade Iraq without planning it fully and it'll also be BUSH who decides if action is needed against Iran militarily. he's the decider. it's BUSH, so aim your correct vitriol at him not her. BUSH's fault, say it over and over again and it's very clear.
I can't help but think that a certain amount of misogyny, even now, is informing many opinions regarding Clinton. When she is serious and confident, voters are intimidated; when she's warm and humorous, she is accused of being too 'motherly' or 'coddling' the nation with phony gestures. It's not as though the men who are running are facing such harsh, unforgiving criticisms when they illustrate zest or confidence. In fact, Hillary is one of the more soft-spoken and pedantic Presidential candidates!
Don't get me wrong; there are certain policies of hers that I disagree with. Her voting record has its own share of hiccups as well, to be sure (although there is a lot of misrepresentation regarding the bill to authorise the war in Iraq, for example). Nonetheless, she is hardly "Bush lite." She is simply a little more experienced, realistic, and moderate than many of the idealistic bleeding hearts gunning for the office. We may love men like Kucinich or Gravel, but their naivety sometimes horrifies me. They would get into the White House only to discover how complicated running the world's foremost superpower truly is. It is a similar situation with Barack, who seems to think that one can stomp into office and turn the nation on its head. What about the nation's interests? What about the Republican voters, who also need to be represented by the President?
Finally, I felt that Clinton handled herself well in this interview. She understands the game perfectly and even then she has some very liberal ideas that she plans on grinding into the system. For example, her plan to send envoys to all corners of the world to explain that "the days of cowboy diplomacy are over" is brilliant and ballsy, but also necessary. She knows that there will be a lot of work ahead in rebuilding the U.S. in terms of its reputation as well as its relationships with other countries. And she's the only person who doesn't seem entirely green about what is necessary.
Not to mention that having Bill about for moral and intellectual support is never a bad thing.
I don't dislike Ms Clinton and I agree that she is a brilliant person and that she is probably "playing the game". That being said, she voted to allow the chimpster to kill a million Iraqis and for that she will never receive my support. I have always voted Democratic but am going to vote in the GOP primary for Ron Paul.
Barrack's wife works for the CFR. They are all CFR candidates except for Paul, Kucinich and Ravel.
We need a peaceful revolution!
Chuck Hagel is a Republican. Read "Invasion of the Party Snatchers".
We are not up against "Republicans" we are up againsts "corporatists". Hillary is a "corporatists". That is what they have done to this system, they have doubled down, or split the Aces, so to speak.
They own a faction in both parties and are trying to fool us into thinking they are different.
and if you think she has the "balls" to "beat the republicans", think about how much courage it takes to give in and suck-up to the corporatists and lobbiests.
She has no courage, not like Kucinich has. She is a coward and a sell-out. Just like bush.
John Tully @ 7:
Strawberry @ 21:
You and I made similar posts at the same time, so we can go down in flames together. :)
Seriously though, it seems that we're thinking along similar lines: she is cut out for the job. She understands the job. She knows that reconciling a divided nation, let alone a divided planet, is going to be an incredibly difficult endeavour. Throwing a radically left, economically inexperienced fellow in the White House is as unfair as it was for Bush to become President.
Johnny2Bad @ 32:
Yes...Purdy please. With sugar on top.
She definitly looks presidential now. Obama always looks like he isn't ready. Hillary scares me though - when she looks straight in the camera - aaaagghh!!! the abysss!!!!
She says she voted for the Kyle Amendment to call them terrorist and so that Bush can't attack them!?? What?
I love politics. They tell you want you want to hear and they DO something else.
I know where the back door is. Bush gives her advice through the corporations that he has made richer and that she will help make richer.
I'm sorry that i don't have a time machine for those who want to go back to the 90s. It's over. Join us in the future, are you guys still wearing MC hammer pants?
Dennis Kucinich 2008!!
Only three possibilities (IMO) for her vote on Lieberman/Kyl:
- she's too stupid to recognize that it's the proverbial camel's nose under the tent; or
- she supports an expansion into Iran; or
- she wants to look tough, but doesn't see the long-term implications
Either way, she's unfit for the nomination.
Shawnmeat @ 33:
Come on, I mean really. Shes going to be an F-ing lightning rod for the right wing. You want to activate the nutbag base??? Nominate Hillary.
yeah, here she is "playing the game" selling out to insurance companies because she takes so much from them and doesn't want the money to dry up.
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/hillarys-health-care-plan-unv...
It's Me @ 14:
======================
Oh puh-LEEZE, that woman is freakishly intelligent, very calculating (not necessarily a bad thing) and is used to getting what she wants (again, not necessarily a bad thing...) BUT let's not assign qualities to her that aren't there, like compassion or honor. Like any good politician, she'll take action and paint it a certain way, but underneath it there will always be a strong vein of self-interest and -service. She and her husband owe a lot of favors to get where they are now, so don't think she's not beholden to all kinds of unsavory interests. She'll win, and she'll only give back JUST enough of our original rights to keep the American people complacent. She'll continue to feed our god-awful military industrial complex, our civil rights will continue to be eroded and corporations will continue to tighten their grip on the American people. Environmental responsibility will get LOTS of lip service by the new Clinton Administration but nothing will be done to stop global warming, pollution or famine. She won't force Big Pharma to do the humane thing and make their life-saving medicines affordable. She won't force Big Energy to make critical changes in their infrastructure. She will strangely "fail" at making government-funded medical care a reality. Main-stream media won't make a miraculous return to integrity and credibility under Hhillary's presidency, American news will just get more and more propagandized. Lobbying reform laws will NEVER happen, they're her meat and potatoes. Just wait and see, she's bought and paid for, and the way things are going will just get worse.
Shawnmeat @ 33:
I agree, I like Dennis...a lot. But he'll get drilled by the right and the middle. If Hillary does get the nomination and the White House...IT WILL BE OUR JOB AS CITIZENS TO KEEP HER DOING WHAT IS IN OUR BEST INTEREST. We can't just get folks elected and walk away. I doubt Hillary will be as tone deaf to the American people as bushy.
and here is information on her "blind trust" that put 25 million in her pocket from the Iraq war....
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/blind-trust-in-hillary/
Yeah, she is just "playing the game" alright. and doing well for herself at it too.
Crap like this drives me over the edge about Hillary. (Hell, calling her "Hillary" bugs me too.)
xxx @ 19:
No wonder those republicans win. They got people like you they can outsmart. They are not afraid of her, they are calling her out because they want her to get the nomination. She'd be the easiest to rip apart. They got enough dirt on her, it'll be an easy battle for them. When people are truly afraid of someone they don't talk about it. Bush has been quite for awhile..
Shawnmeat @ 29:
I would prefer a woman candidate . . . just not this one. Too much payola under the bridge.
Conan @ 44:
Conan, both of my Republican sisters in law who voted for Bush...twice...are voting for Hillary.
and what do you people base the opinion that Kucinich will be beaten by the right on? The fact that he was the youngest mayor in clevelands history, or the fact that he runs clean campaigns without accepting money from lobbiests or special interest groups and keeps winning his seat in the House?
Maybe the fact that he had the real courage to stand up for what he believed in in 2002 and called for a no vote to go to war?
While Guiliani wears a dress and charges 9.11 for tickets, this man is trying to impeach Cheney. Yeah, that isn't presidential or anything.
Just give up on dennis without any reason, that's what the media who is trying to Hillary wants you to do.
do you think that her "blind trust" isn't going to come out in the general elections? How about her Walmart stock skyrocketing right after Bill signed NAFTA into law?
Leaders are people who get others to follow them. Bush didn't need to lead....the ultra-right wing and evangelicals pretty much pushed him into the White House.
I expect more from a Clinton. Hillary hasn't expalined why I need to follow her.
I think I'm voting Green if she gets the nomination. I can't vote for any Clinton ever again. We need to move on. We need new blood. For all their flaws, I'd take Edwards or Obama over Hillary any day.
Now if Al Gore ran, I would cream my pants.
E Ryno @ 45:
I should note that I appreciate that there are also many who aren't a little sexist in their views of Hillary. Nonetheless, I don't 'prefer' either gender simply because it does little to nothing in terms of suggesting whether or not they will be competent or not as the Commander in Chief.
Also, a lot of the 'Hillary is a corporate schill!' talk frustrates me because it's a talking-point and easily-digestible soundbyte, the same way that 'Barack is green!' or 'Barack is not patriotic!' or 'Gravel is a crazy hobo!' are all instances of conjecture that, through repeation, have become fact. Many of those who discuss Hillary as a stone-cold, heartless opportunist (again, this is where I believe a lot of misogyny enters the picture) can't back that up. They heard it from someone who read something that someone else suggested, perhaps using circumstantial evidence at most.
I'm not saying that she doesn't have skeletons, because she surely does if she's in the political ballpark at all. Nonetheless, I think that people are regurgitating the same squaw like the annoying seagull-sheep that they are. (Yes, the imagery there can be fun!)
That woman must think we're all mentally retarded. She says she voted to label the Iranian military as a "terrorist organization" so that GW Bush would have "leverage" in pursuing diplomacy with Iran.
That's the same thing she said about Iraq when she voted to authorize *that* invasion. She's basically GW Bush in a skirt. Similar foreign policy, and a complete disregard for the publics' intelligence-- not to mention it's will.
willyloman @ 47:
=========
I agree, Dennis Kucinich has impressed me the most. I feel that if he were elected our country would have a much greater chance of fixing this terrible mess we're in. Has anyone here listened to him? He's amazing in that he speaks about things logically, using COMMON SENSE! I love it! Notice how just about every other presidential candidate is way behind the curve on everything? And that the opinion of the American majority is a mystery to them? Well, when I hear Kucinich speak I hear someone who gets it. He seems to be the only one, though Gore gets it too.
Johnny2Bad @ 38:
You are suggesting going against your natural instincts in favour of outright fear of the Dreaded Right. I say we let them have their lightning rod, because both Clintons have been taking their shit for a decade and a half and have always emerged as more intelligent and reasonable. And I will always oppose the idea that people should vote based on concern for what the Right might do in retribution. Fuck them. Stop giving them that power.
Proving again that Keith is only good at taking on the Republicans.
There's just something about Hillary that I mistrust - I do think she IS a ruthlessly ambitious, amoral opportunist who has made countless Deals With Devils, over time. (Which, come to think of it, also describes Lincoln and F.D.R.) Is there any center of idealism left at all in HRC 2007? Your guess is as good as mine. I still wish that she could be stopped in the primaries, but I'm afraid I'll end up holding my nose and voting for her next year...
What most unsettled me this week, actually, was her reply to Keith Olbermann when he asked her why she voted for Kyl-Lieberman. It does NOT mean an authorization to go to war with Iran, Hillary claimed; surely the President wouldn't take advantage of Congress just naming the Iranian government as active terrorists? Her vote was just a way of assuring continued diplomacy, she swore.
I guess that's like when she and Congress told the same White House that war with Saddam was absolutely, POSITIVELY the last resort...
She is looking more Presidential every day.
Come on people. She is obviously the best candidate at this point.
Strawberry @ 46:
They got good judgement. Vote Hillary cause' I voted for Bush.
I try to listen to Ms. Clinton as if I were an average citizen, not too involved in politics, not too aware of behind-the-scenes maneuvers and deals.
With that perspective, she comes across very well, despite her evasive response to the MoveOn brouhaha. I'm glad she used the words "appalled" and "mean-spirited" in reference to the attacks on Frost. Personally, even knowing all I know, I am willing to support her as our next duly-elected president. I feel the same way about Edwards, Obama, Kucinich, et al.
Uncle Joe, saving the Supreme Court is a critical issue, one which will affect generations beyond us, particularly women and minorities. Look at their recent rulings, and consider what we've lost already with these strident reactionary right-wingers that bush appointed. My gawd, try to imagine another Scalia or Alito on the court. *shudder*
to the person that says calling Hillary a corporate shill is just a republoican "talking point" I would seriously ask that person to
look into her blind trust...
look at her lobbiest "bundling"...
and look at what she is planning with health care...
Please do not just assume that the candidate we really want, the one who accepts no corporate money and will remove our troops (before the election) the day he takes office, and the one who tried like hell to keep them from going there in the first place...
please don't buy the "talking point" that he can't win. because that is saying "we can't have what we want"!
when in all honesty, we can! The media wants you to think he can't win, because he supports Campaign Finance Reform!
please, if you want the man and think he would make a great president, don't give up while he is still trying. he can win the nomination, and in thus doing so, we can tell these corporatist bastards that this is still our country.
>Only three possibilities (IMO) for her vote on Lieberman/Kyl:
>- she’s too stupid to recognize that it’s the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent; or
>- she supports an expansion into Iran; or
>- she wants to look tough, but doesn’t see the long-term implications
4. AIPAC.
I voted for Bill Clinton twice. That is enough as far as I am concerned. I believe in term limits. The notion of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, is unacceptable to me. In a country of over 300 million people, surely we can drawn on the talent of more than two families. I had a hard time typing talent in reference to the bush's, but I am not creative enough to use another word.
My God, The Republican sinks to the lowest low yet. That's pretty bad when you start throwing little kids under the bus. They were caught in one of their biggest lies, the economy. It's only more proof that the economy is in shambles. They REALLY don't care about their reputations and record occupying the deepest depths of the sewer. Kind of makes you wonder why?
Gore/Kucinich '08!
Shawnmeat @ 54:
We can't nominate Ronald Reagan for the 1980 Republican convention because the liberal media will be making fun of that Chimp movie that he made for his whole term.
psa23dg @ 62:
During one or two elections?
win first change later isnt that what put the current crop of spineless dinos in office.i ajust can't trust who would give bush the power for another possiable war,especially after what happened the first time around. and if barack is so inexperienced why does she keep changing her mind to follow his lead. and as one who has yet to make up her mind i am very tired of these so called front runners{both parties}being shoved down my throat. frankly i wish we could get a whole new crop.
willyloman @ 60:
I am not saying that there aren't elements of truth to whatever accusations come up; I am saying that many individuals dislike her and therefore hop on the spread-the-word bandwagon because now they have a morcel with which to discredit the woman.
And so many of these blogs have bits and pieces of information, usually quoted from other blogs. Not everything you read is true. There are two sides to every story, and all that jazz.
Also, I was not suggesting for a second that people should vote for Hillary Clinton because she is the only viable option in terms of odds. I am suggesting that she is the most professional, well-spoken, diplomatic, and goal-oriented. She is a realist who does have what it takes to win and also represent America well. She is not a wingnut supporting idealistic, fringe theories.
When she was talking about Iran she used the phrase, "...there can be no doubt..." which was just a little too reminiscent of assertions made about Iraq by the likes of Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, etc. That causes a bit of worry.
Shawnmeat @ 54: